"Re: [xml] Something better than _private?"

[Kasimier Buchcik <kbuchcik 4commerce de>]

Hi,

Daniel Veillard wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 17, 2003 at 02:44:08PM +0200, Enno Rehling wrote:
>
> > I want to store user-data on document nodes, but since everone else 
> > (libxslt, I hear) is also using _private, I'm not sure that that's such a 
> > good place to put it. Is there an alternative way? Any best practice for this?
>
>
>   No, _private is the dedicated place for this.
> The fact that libxslt modifies the node has a simple rule:
>    libxslt modifies the document it's being passed to be transformed
>    if you want to transform a document you're using for other processing
>    you must make a copy of it first and handle that copy to libxslt.
> I'm not gonna add a new field for this reason.
>
> Daniel

I have an additional question concerning this issue:
We use the xmlDoc's _private field in some cases; since it works fine I 
assume that the xmlDoc's _private field is not touched by 
transformations. Daniel, is this correct? Will it be save to use this 
field on the xmlDoc if transforming?

Thanks,

Kasimier Buchcik